Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Undefined subroutine CGI::scalar #215

Open
eserte opened this issue May 4, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@eserte
Copy link
Contributor

commented May 4, 2019

I see the following failure on some of my smokers:

Template process failed: undef error - Undefined subroutine CGI::scalar
 at input text line 3.

FAILED 4:  - template text 1 process FAILED: [% USE scalar -%]\n[% USE cgi = C...
FAILED 5:  - (obviously did not match expected)
Template process failed: undef error - Undefined subroutine CGI::scalar
 at input text line 2.

FAILED 6:  - template text 2 process FAILED: [% USE scalar -%]\nname: [% globa...
FAILED 7:  - (obviously did not match expected)
Template process failed: undef error - Undefined subroutine CGI::scalar
 at input text line 3.

FAILED 8:  - template text 3 process FAILED: [% USE scalar -%]\n[% FOREACH key...
FAILED 9:  - (obviously did not match expected)
Template process failed: undef error - Undefined subroutine CGI::scalar
 at input text line 3.

FAILED 10:  - template text 4 process FAILED: [% USE scalar -%]\n[% FOREACH key...
FAILED 11:  - (obviously did not match expected)
t/cgi.t ...................... 
Failed 8/15 subtests 

Possible reason: CGI.pm is too old here. Statistical analysis (theta=0 means "bad"):

****************************************************************
Regression 'mod:CGI'
****************************************************************
Name           	       Theta	      StdErr	 T-stat
[0='const']    	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.90
[1='eq_4.13']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   6.02
[2='eq_4.26']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	5711157960714114.00
[3='eq_4.32']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	6994711422091855.00
[4='eq_4.35']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	5711157960714112.00
[5='eq_4.36']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	7373073223135224.00
[6='eq_4.37']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	5711157960714112.00
[7='eq_4.38']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	7872287976137146.00
[8='eq_4.39']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	7732944434630638.00
[9='eq_4.40']  	      1.0000	      0.0000	7802927258674097.00
[10='eq_4.42'] 	      1.0000	      0.0000	7975198069129376.00

R^2= 1.000, N= 96, K= 11
****************************************************************

(There are also other results with R^2=1, but this one seems to be the most likely)

@eserte

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 4, 2019

Better statistical analysis available, now with 3 instead 2 fail reports. This time theta=-1 means "bad". So at least 4.09 and 4.13 are problematic:

****************************************************************
Regression 'mod:CGI'
****************************************************************
Name           	       Theta	      StdErr	 T-stat
[0='const']    	      1.0000	      0.0000	6945252373601183.00
[1='eq_3.49']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.67
[2='eq_3.52']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.66
[3='eq_3.63']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   2.55
[4='eq_4.09']  	     -1.0000	      0.0000	-5670774816725540.00
[5='eq_4.13']  	     -1.0000	      0.0000	-4911035050425360.00
[6='eq_4.26']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.48
[7='eq_4.28']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.31
[8='eq_4.30']  	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.52
[9='eq_4.31']  	     -0.0000	      0.0000	  -0.07
[10='eq_4.32'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   1.09
[11='eq_4.35'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   1.06
[12='eq_4.36'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.87
[13='eq_4.37'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   1.34
[14='eq_4.38'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   1.60
[15='eq_4.39'] 	     -0.0000	      0.0000	  -1.55
[16='eq_4.40'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   0.75
[17='eq_4.42'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   1.20
[18='eq_4.43'] 	      0.0000	      0.0000	   2.59

R^2= 1.000, N= 154, K= 19
****************************************************************
@toddr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented May 6, 2019

ok so you're suggesting we require CGI => "4.26" ?

@eserte

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 6, 2019

My suggestion would be somewhat more defensive, looking like the following:
https://github.com/eserte/tk-pod/blob/cd78d8d884236c623733b6d30bd77bc0325eed0b/Makefile.PL#L35-L43

@eserte

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 6, 2019

(Especially because CGI 4.x is significantly slower than older versions, and people might want to stick with 3.x for a while)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.